[XLS]iati.dfid.gov.ukiati.dfid.gov.uk/iati_documents/7156011.xlsx · Web viewBetter teacher performance and better teaching Output Indicator 2.3 First test conducted at acceptable

PESP 2 Log-Frame

IMPACT Impact Indicator 1

Literacy rate, Punjab Planned 62%Achieved 62% 62%

SourcePSLM Survey ('12-'13)

Impact Indicator 2

Planned 40.20%Achieved 40.20% 40.20%

SourceMICS 2011

Impact Indicator 3

Real GDP growth per capita, Pakistan Planned 4.30%Achieved 2.30% 4.30%

SourceWorld Bank, State Bank of Pakistan Annual Report

OUTCOME Outcome Indicator 1 Assumptions

Planned Girls: 87%, Boys: 89%Achieved Girls: 87%, Boys: 89%

SourceNielsen, Household survey (Jan 2014)

Outcome Indicator 2

Planned Girls: 78%, Boys: 82%Achieved Girls: 78%, Boys: 82%

SourceNielsen, Household survey (Jan 2014)

Outcome Indicator 3

Planned

Achieved

SourceASER survey; PMIU; Independent bi-annual assessment

Outcome Indicator 4

Student attendance PlannedAchieved 90.00%

SourcePMIU monthly data

INPUTS (£) DFID (£) Govt (£) Other (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)

INPUTS (HR) DFID (FTEs)

OUTPUT 1 Output Indicator 1.1 Assumptions

Planned

Achieved

SourceTAMO progress reports, annual reviews, and external evaluations/ assessments, PMIU monthly data

Output Indicator 1.2 Assumptions

Planned

Achieved

SourceTAMO DFC Quaterly Audit of MEA visits, PMIU data

IMPACT WEIGHTING (%) Output Indicator 1.3 Assumptions

Planned

Achieved All schools: 51 (weighted)

SourceFinance Department, Govt of Punjab.


Planned

Achieved

SourcePTB workplan, TAMO Reports on PTB, Roadmap reports, TPV of Textbooks Development process and procurement system.

Output Indicator 2.2

Planned

Achieved

SourceBi-annual assessment report


Integrity of PEC exams Planned

Achieved

SourceThird party validation


Planned

Achieved

SourceThird party review.


Planned 14% 13% 11% 10%

Achieved16% 15%

SourcePMIU


Improved school infrastructure Planned

AchievedSourcePMIU monthly data


Planned

AchievedSourceTACE progress reports, third party validation reports, TAMO monitoring


Planned

Achieved

SourcePMIU school census


Planned

AchievedSourceHousehold survey, TAMO Reports


Planned

Achieved

SourceTAMO Reports


PlannedAchieved

SourcePIEF progress reports


Planned

AchievedSourceHousehold survey, TAMO reports


Planned

Achieved

SourceTAMO Reports

PROJECT NAME PUNJAB EDUCATION SECTOR PROGRAMME 2 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Baseline (January 2013)

Milestone 1 (February 2014)

Milestone 2 (November 2014)

Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

More educated people in Punjab making a positive social and economic contribution




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Secondary school participation rate, Punjab




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

More children in school, staying longer, and learning more

Increased participation rate for primary school aged population (ages 5-9)

-Government stays stable and in place

- Macro-economic situation (both at national & provincial level) improves and economic growth accelerates;

- Political and security situation in the country improves;

- No major humanitarian disaster in the provinces;

- Institutional risks related to devolution/ recentralisation and formation of new administrative areas are appropriately mitigated;

Girls: 87%, Boys: 89%




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Increased participation rate for secondary school aged population (ages 10-16)

Girls: 78%, Boys: 82%




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Improved student outcomes: -Percentage of students able to read a sentence in Urdu (source: ASER / LND drive)-Percentage of students able to conduct simple mathematical computations (source: ASER / LND drive)-Average score on DfID funded 6 monthly assessment-Optional: Average PEC scores for Grades 5 & 8 (2016 onwards)

Grade 3 that can read: 26%; Grade 3 that can do double digit subtraction: 31%






Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Better managed, more accountable education system

Number of districts with effective, targeted system wide performance management system

Performance management system initiated in at least 1 district.

Performance management system nitiated in at least 2 district.

Performance management refined based on learnings from pilot and scaled up

Capacity developed for 18 of 36 districts in system level performance management

Capacity developed for all 36 districts in system level performance management

Stakeholders, including political leadership and bureacracy are accepting and supportive of need to implement performance management and willing to support in providing incentives and enforcing consequences

Appropriate national and international consultants are available

District leadership provides commitment and resources to ensure implementation of performance management

Tenure and longevity of officials enables continuity of reform

Devolution of provincial and district functions and powers not reversed

No performance management system in place.

No performance management system in place.




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Frequency of MEA visits and better reliability of data collected

90% school visit rate maintained every month

Tablet based real time data collection system successfully piloted in 8 Districts with a minimum of two rounds of data collection.


Tablet based real time data collection system rolled out in all 18 districts.


Tablet based real time data collection system rolled out in all 36 districts.


Tablet based real time data collection system continued


Tablet based real time data collection system continued

Availability of field coordinators and access granted to conduct school audits

PMIU actively addresses MEA reporting errors

72% of schools covered by MEA visits

Paper based data collection system compiled at end of month




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Percentage of Functional School Councils covering monthly meetings, expenditure of grants/ budgets and improvement in teacher presence

All schools: All schools: All schools: All schools: Availability of capable and effective audit to assess and evaluate spending

Administration supportive of audits and collaborative

All schools: 33 (weighted)




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Better teacher performance and better teaching

Number of new textbooks, teacher guides, and workbooks developed in line with new curriculum

Work on 3 model textbooks & workbooks developed and approved by PTB

Improved SOPs and criteria for manuscript review defined based on model textbooks

Diagnostic of PTB's procurement process and opportunities for improvement indentif ied and quantified

Implementation of recommended improvements to procurement process

Printing and distribution of textbooks on time for 2015-16 year

Development of a detailed budget forecast for fiscal year 2015-16

Tender development of grade 1 Urdu, and grade 2-5 Urdu, English, math, science/general knowledge manuscripts & workbooks (for 2016-17)

International publishers and top local publishers invited to participate in tender process

Implementation of new SOPs and criteria during manuscript review


Teacher guides developed for all new textbooks developed

Diagnostic of accounting, audit, and governance processes

Implementation of recommendations for accounting, audit, and governance

Tender development of grade 6-10 Urdu, English, math, science manuscripts & workbooks (for 2017-18)

Diagnostic of new textbooks introduced


Implementation of recommendations for accounting, audit, and governance


Current curriculum complexity exceeds required student learning outcomes at each grade level; simplification and prioritization of curriculum will enable critical student learning outcomes to be taught to allow students to learn at the right level for their grade

Current textbooks are not structured correctly in terms of pedagogy and content and need to be redesigned to ensure students are able to absorb content

Teaching in schools improves when teachers provided easy to use, scripted lesson plans and teacher guides

Textbooks do not meet acceptable standards of pedagogy and content appropriateness





Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Bi-annual learning assessment system in place.

First test conducted at acceptable standard of quality and reliability

Baseline levels of student learning established

Independent student assessment conducted to acceptable standard twice during year

Improvement targets for Outcome indicator 3 defined

Independent student assessment conducted reliably on bi-annual basis



No province-wide independent assessment of student learning in schools





Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

PEC exams administered under new, devolved invigilation system

PEC exams administered incorporating learnings from 2015 examinations

PEC exams executed reliably with incorporated learnings through the report of TPV.

PEC exams executed reliably with incorporated learnings from 2016 examinations

Current PEC exam results are not an accurate measure of student performance

New plan will dis-incentivize cheating

PEC exam conduct unreliable with frequent instances of leakage and cheating

PEC improvement plan developed and approved by School Education Department




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Quality and delivery of teacher training and mentoring.

DTE attendance >95%. Develop DTE strategy

DTE attendance at 100%

Pilot strategy in 2 districts

Expand implementation to 9 districts



Full time management of DTEs and improved DTE training and performance management will enable DTEs to provide better coaching to teachers

DTE attendance: 94%. No full time district and cluster level administration for DTEs. No clear DTE KPIs and performance management

DTE attendance at 94%. No full time district and cluster level administration for DTEs. No clear DTE KPIs and performance management




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Teacher absentee rates in government schools




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Better learning environment

Drinking water: Available: 99%,

Functional: 99%; Toilets: Available: 98%, Functional: 97%; Walls:

Available: 93%, Functional: 92%;

Electricity: Available: 85%, Functional: 84%

Drinking water: Available: 99%, Functional: 99%; Toilets: Available: 98%, Functional: 97%; Walls:

Available: 93%, Functional: 92%; Electricity: Available:

85%, Functional: 84%

All districts with a functioning of facilities >90% or a clear plan to improve functioning of facilities to >90% within the current school year

All districts with functioning of facilities >90%







Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Number of schools rehabilitated to iinternational standards

Schools - 4099

Classrooms - 8871

Schools - 2957

Classrooms - 5957

Schools - 2900

Classrooms - 5047

Schools - 1909

Classrooms - 3123

Schools - 11865

Classrooms - 23000




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Reduction in classrooms with multigrade teaching

Complete rationalization of teachers; syndicate and finalize decision to do alternate year entry and double shifting with SED; complete pre-planning and school identification by compiling list of schools with multi-grade, along with the classroom and teacher requirement in each; use list to identify (i) schools for launch of AYE (ii) schools for double shifting; (iii) remaining schools for construction of classrooms and provision of newly hired teachers; syndicate lists and roll out mechanisms with SED; plan out schedule of classroom construction over next 4 years, in concert with IMC initiative; secure funding from GoPb for classroom construction project and for hiring teachers

Launch AYE and double shifting; start construction of classrooms as per budget release schedule; start hiring of teachers

Continue construction of classrooms and hiring of teachers as per budget release schedule

Continue construction of classrooms and hiring of teachers as per budget release schedule

Complete construction of classrooms and hiring of teachers

No multi-grade classrooms

3.8 million children in multi-grade classrooms; requirement of 20k classrooms and 20k net newly hired teachers (after accounting for retirements) to eliminate most severe instances of multi-grade

3.8 million children in multi-grade classrooms; requirement of 20k classrooms and 20k net newly hired teachers (after accounting for retirements) to eliminate most severe instances of multi-grade




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Improved access to schools, especially in priority districts

Participation rate (primary, middle, secondary) disaggregated by gender in priority districts.




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Number of children in school supported through the Punjab Education Foundation (cumulative) i) EVS ii) NSP iii) FAS

(i) 358,000 ii) 111,000 iii) 430,000

(i) 483,000 ii) 149,000 iii) 650,000

(i) 608,000 ii) 195,000 iii) 932,000

(i) 733,000 ii) 257,000 iii) 1,288,000

(i) 150,000 ii) 62,000 iii) 155,000

(i) 250,000 ii) 83,000 iii) 267,000




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Number of children supported through Punjab Inclusive Education Program




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Enhanced demand for education

Number of children supported through financial aid, disaggregated by gender, level of education




Milestone 32015

Milestone 42016

Milestone 52017

Target 2018

Number of households directly reached with behaviour change messages under social mobilization campaign in priority districts

No communication plan in place

Communication plan draft complete

Roll out communication plan in priority districts

X households attended presentation

X households attended presentation



Sheet 1

Sheet 2

Sheet 3

Sheet 4

Sheet 5

Sheet 6

Sheet 7

Sheet 8

Sheet 9

Sheet 10

Sheet 11

Sheet 12

Punjab Education Sector Program ( PESP) II - Logical Framework

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Logical Framework - Process ( All updates highlighted in bright yellow)

Logical Framework - PESP II

Definitions and Calculations

Supporting Evidence (SE) - Outcome Indicator 1 & 2

Supporting Evidence (SE) - Outcome Indicator 3

Supporting Evidence (SE) - Output Indicator 1.1

Supporting Evidence (SE) - Output Indicator 4.1 & 5.3




Logical Framework - Output Risk

PESP II - Logframe - Process

PESP II - Logframe Process

Logical Framework

Overall aim of PESP II Impact Level Impact Statement

Specific aims PESP II is contributing towards. Outcome Level Outcome Statement

Output Level

Output Level

Exact delivery objectives of PESP II Output Level Output Statement

Output Level

Output Level

PESP II - Logframe Process

Logical Framework

1 More educated people in Punjab making a positive social and economic contribution

1 More children in school, staying longer, and learning more

1 Better managed, more accountable education system

2 Better teacher performance and better teaching

3 Better learning environment

4 Improved access to schools, especially in priority districts

5 Enhanced demand for education

PESP II - Logframe Process Internal Programming and Monitoring/Evaluation of PESP II

Indicators Baselines Milestones(2012/2013) (2014 - 2017)

Impact Indicators 1, 2 & 3

Outcome Indicators 1, 2, 3 & 4

Output Indicators 1.1, 1.2 & 1.3

Output Indicators 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 & 2.5




Data Sources

Means of Verification (MoV)

Underlying Assumptions (Theory of Change)

Internal Programming and Monitoring/Evaluation of PESP II

Targets(2018/2019)

Quarterly Review by DFID - TAMO

1 Revision of Milestones/Targets

2 Modification/Improvement of Indicators

PESP II Log-Frame - Updated version 10 September 2015

IMPACT Impact Indicator 1 Attribution/Project

Literacy rate, Punjab Government of Punjab Planned 62% 62% 63% 63% 64%Achieved 62% 62% 62%

SourcePSLM Survey

Impact Indicator 2 Attribution/Project

Government of Punjab Planned Girls: 63% Boys: 66% Girls: 65% Boys:68%

Achieved

SourceNielsen Household Survey

Impact Indicator 3 Attribution/Project

Real GDP growth per capita, Pakistan Planned 4.30% 4.30% 4.60% 5.00% 5.00%Achieved 2.30% 4.30% 4.30%

SourceWorld Bank

PROJECT NAME

Baseline 2012/13

Milestone 1 (January 2014)


Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

More educated people in Punjab making a positive social and economic contribution

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Secondary completion rate (proxy by students aged 15-16 enrolled in school)

Girls: 63%Boys: 66%

Girls: 64% Boys:67%

Girls: 68%Boys: 70%

Girls: 63%Boys: 66%

Girls: 63%Boys: 66%

Girls: 63%Boys: 66%

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Government of Pakistan

OUTCOME Outcome Indicator 1 Attribution/Project Assumptions

Planned

Achieved


Notes* See Sheet 5 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Outcome Indicator 1 & 2' for additional detail.Outcome Indicator 2 Attribution/Project

Planned

Achieved


Notes* See Sheet 5 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Outcome Indicator 1 & 2' for additional detail.Outcome Indicator 3 Attribution/Project

Planned

Achieved

SourceDFID / TAMO Six Monthly Grade 3 assessment

Notes* See Sheet 6 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Outcome Indicator 3' for disaggregated ( March and September ) SLO Milestones.Outcome Indicator 4 Attribution/Project

Student attendance Government of Punjab Planned

Achieved 90.00% 92.00%

SourcePMIU Monthly Data

Notes* Achievement against this indicator shall be computed as a rolling average rather than on a month-by-month basis - hence, the relevant milestone for each year is maintaining > 90 % twelve month average student attendance.

INPUTS (£) DFID (£) Govt (£) Other - WB (£) Total (£) DFID SHARE (%)420.5 5,815 217 6382.5 5.49%

INPUTS (HR) DFID (FTEs) Barbara Payne (BP) , Javed Malik (JM) , Aliya Usmani (AU) , Ahmed Malik (AM) , Fahad Suleri (FS) , Omar Mukhtar (OM) , SDA [pending appointment] (MS) , Shamas Bajwa (SB), Laura Norris (NS)

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

More children in school, staying longer, and learning more

Participation rate for primary school aged population (ages 5-9)

Participation rate for primary school aged population (ages 5-9) in 11 priority districts*

TAMO - SED - Special Education Department - PMIU

Punjab average:Girls: 87%, Boys: 89%

Punjab average:Girls: 88.5%, Boys: 91%

Punjab average:Girls: 89.5%, Boys: 92.5%


Punjab average: Girls: 94%, Boys: 96%

-Government stays stable and in place

- Macro-economic situation (both at national & provincial level) improves and economic growth accelerates;

- Political and security situation in the country improves;

- No major humanitarian disaster in the provinces;

- Institutional risks related to devolution/ recentralisation and formation of new administrative areas are appropriately mitigated; - Maintaining children' attendance and learning outcomes becomes more of a challenge as more and more children enter and are retained in schools

Punjab average: Girls: 85.1%, Boys: 88.4%

Priority districts: Girls: 74.4%, Boys: 80.8%

(Nielsen Survey November 2012)






(Neilson Survey: January 2015)

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Participation rate for secondary school aged population (ages 10-16)

Participation rate for secondary school aged population (ages 10-16) in 11 priority districts*

TAMO - SED - Special Education Department - PMIU


Priority districts:


Priority districts:


Priority districts:


Priority districts:


Priority districts:









(Neilson Survey: January 2015)

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Student learning outcomes: Average scores by subject for March and September six-monthly assessments ( Grade 3 students)

TAMO - SED - PMIU - DSD

Percentage of Grade 3 students that achieve specific SLOs for each subject English, Math, and Urdu

Milestones for 2015 onwards to be developed after establishing baseline

Percentage of Grade 3 students that achieve specific SLOs for each subject English, Math, and Urdu *

Math: 65%English: 59%Urdu: 56%









Percentage of Grade 3 students achieving core Grade 2 SLOs:

March 2015 Assessment Scores: Math: 67%English: 53%Urdu: 56% September 2014 Assessment Scores: Math: 57%English: 58%Urdu: 50%

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

90% attendance rate maintained every month*

90% attendance rate maintained every month*( 90 % boys schools ; 90 % girls schools)




90.3% [12 month average to Nov 2014]

BP TL (0.5) JM (1) AU (1) AM (1) FS (0.5) OM (0.5) SDA (0.5) SB (0.5) LN (0.5)

OUTPUT 1 Output Indicator 1.1 Attribution/Project Assumptions

TAMO - SED - PMIU Planned

Achieved

SourceTAMO progress reports, External evaluations/ assessments, PMIU monthly data

Notes

** Including alignment with regular EDO Conferences

Output Indicator 1.2 Attribution/Project Assumptions

TAMO - RM - PMIU Planned

Achieved

SourceTAMO DFC Quarterly Audit of MEA visits, PMIU data & MEA checklists, TPV Data Quality Reports

Notes* In light of the successful rollout of the tablet based real time data collection system in all 36 districts in Y1, these milestones have been revised upwards as of May 2015 ( note for the Annual Review in Jan 2016)

** For detail on the exact processes for verification of data quality and robustness, see the " Target Definition" against Output Indicator 1.2 in Sheet 4 titled " Definitions and Calculations".


TAMO - SED - PMIU Planned 50% schools

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Better managed, more accountable education system

Number of districts with effective*, targeted system-wide performance management system

Performance management approach developed and pilot district selected.*

1) Performance management system expanded to cover all 36 districts entailing regular monthly Pre-DRC and re-aligned/ restructured DRC meetings covering new metrics and LND scorecard ** (2) Pilot of Re-engineered business processes in 2 districts commences June/ July 2015 and implemented by May 2016

1) PMS (Pre-DRCs) strengthened and institutionalized as a permanent tier (2) Diagnostic of performance management system (re-engineered business processes) conducted and learnings identified for further refinement based upon evaluation. Post-refinement, this component of the PMS is expanded to another 5 districts

Performance management refined based on learnings from full year roll out

Capacity developed for 18 of 36 districts in system level performance management (Re-engineered business processes)

1) PMS (Pre-DRC) fully institutionalized (2) Capacity developed for all 36 districts in system level performance management (re-engineered business processes)

Stakeholders, including political leadership and bureaucracy are accepting and supportive of need to implement performance management and willing to support in providing incentives and enforcing consequences

Appropriate national and international consultants are available

District leadership provides commitment and resources to ensure implementation of performance management

Tenure and longevity of officials enables continuity of reform

Devolution of provincial and district functions and powers not reversed

No system-wide effective performance management in place.

No system-wide effective performance management in place.

Year 1 Achievements for select components of this indicator are as follows - (1) Performance Management System (PMS) in the form of improved follow up routines (called Pre-DRC Meetings) designed and soft pilot executed in 2 districts of Sheikupura and Bahawalpur

* The Performance Management System (PMS) has two components: (i) Efficient follow up routines (Pre-DRCs) and (ii) Re-engineered business processes of Educational manager offices at district level. In order to benefit from a province-wide implementation process, the approach against this milestone has been re-focused on effective follow-up routines across all 36 districts in Year 1, while the groundwork for the 2 pilot districts (Rahimyar Khan & Hafizabad) has been completed. For additional detail on the process steps, see Sheet 7 titled "Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 1.1".

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Frequency of MEA visits and better reliability of data collected


Tablet based real time data collection system successfully piloted in 8 Districts with a minimum of two rounds of data collection.


Tablet based real time data collection system rolled out in all 36 districts. * Data verified ( for sufficient robustness and quality).** As a test for quality of collected MEA data, the maximum variation between audit data ( from DFC spot checks or TPVs) and collected MEA data for the same schools should be within +/- 10 %


Tablet based real time data collection system rolled out in all 36 districts. * Data verified ( for sufficient robustness and quality).** As a test for quality of collected MEA data, the maximum variation between audit data ( from DFC spot checks or TPVs) and collected MEA data for the same schools should be within +/- 10 %


Tablet based real time data collection system continued * Data verified ( for sufficient robustness and quality).** As a test for quality of collected MEA data, the maximum variation between audit data ( from DFC spot checks or TPVs) and collected MEA data for the same schools should be


Tablet based real time data collection system continued * Data verified ( for sufficient robustness and quality).**

As a test for quality of collected MEA data, the maximum variation between audit data ( from DFC spot checks or TPVs) and collected MEA data for the same schools should be within +/- 10 %

Availability of field coordinators and access granted to conduct school audits

PMIU actively addresses MEA reporting errors



Paper based data collection system compiled at end of month

96% [12 month rolling average to Nov 2014 exl Aug & Sept].

(Compares with 94% to Nov 2013.)

Full transition to tablet based real time data collection system in all 36 districts.

IMPACT WEIGHTING 15%

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Functional Primary School Councils as measured by -Regular meetings held*-Actual utilization of funds

Incremental increase of 5 % over baseline for both components of the indicator ( Regular meetings held and Actual Utilization of funds)




Availability of capable and effective audit to assess and evaluate spending

Administration supportive of audits and collaborative

TAMO - SED - PMIU

Achieved All schools: 33 (weighted) All schools: 51 (weighted)


Notes Risk Rating

* At least two meetings per quarter - Migration from paper-based records to Tablets has initially restricted visibility on regular meetings held, and data will be available once the Tablet is updated. NSB Budget utilization serves as a proxy for school council fund utilization and is tracked through the Tablet system. High

Functional Primary School Councils as measured by -Regular meetings held*-Actual utilization of funds

Meetings; 44%Expenditure: 34%Attendance: 36%

TAMO not yet started working with School Councils due to delays with TACE and CSO.

Milestone not achieved.


TAMO - PMIU - PCTB Planned

Achieved

SourcePCTB workplan, TAMO Reports on PCTB, Roadmap reports, TPV of Textbooks Development process and procurement system.

Notes* Printing of textbooks for a given school year is managed by PCTB and starts from November of the preceding calendar year ( till March), while PMIU is responsible for the distribution of the textbooks in March.Output Indicator 2.2 Attribution/Project

TAMO - RM Planned

Achieved

SourceTAMO Assessment Report, DFC Spot Checks or TPV (whichever is applicable)

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19


New teaching and learning materials developed in line with new curriculum

Work on 3 model textbooks & workbooks developed & approved by PCTB

Improved SOPs and criteria for textbook review defined based on model textbooks

Diagnostic of PCTB's procurement process and opportunities for improvement identified and quantified

TAMO supports PCTB in the development of Grade 2 and 3 Urdu, English, math, textbooks (for 2016-17) *

Printing of textbooks by PCTB (November 2015) and distribution of textbooks by PMIU (March 2016)

TAMO supports PCTB in the development of Grades 4 and 5 textbooks (for 2017-18)*

Printing of textbooks by PCTB (November 2016) and distribution of textbooks by PMIU (March 2017)

Printing of textbooks by PCTB and distribution of textbooks by PMIU on time for 2017-18 year

Printing of textbooks by PCTB and distribution of textbooks by PMIU on time for 2018-19 year

Current curriculum complexity exceeds required student learning outcomes at each grade level; simplification and prioritization of curriculum will enable critical student learning outcomes to be taught to allow students to learn at the right level for their grade

Current textbooks are not structured correctly in terms of pedagogy and content and need to be redesigned to ensure students are able to absorb content

Teaching in schools improves when teachers provided easy to use, scripted lesson plans and teacher guides



The milestone itself has not been met; however, this is because a much better approach was agreed/adopted. Progress includes:

Detailed plan developed, BRAC engaged, School Education Department and PCTB approved plan. Textbooks and teacher guides developed for English and maths with further work planned for Urdu and general studies materials. (Textbook design now brought in-house, developing one model textbook at a time.)

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Six -Monthly learning assessment system in place

First test conducted at acceptable standard of quality and reliability ( Grade 3)

Baseline levels of student learning established

Independent student assessment successfully conducted to acceptable standard twice during year (Grade 3)

Assessment expanded to cover PEF schools, Daanish Schools, and other private schools in September 2015

Independent student assessment conducted reliably on six- monthly basis, ensuring robustness and reliability (Grade 3)

Independent student assessment conducted reliably on six - monthly basis, ensuring robustness and reliability (Grade 3)

Independent student assessment conducted reliably on six - monthly basis, ensuring robustness and reliability (Grade 3)



September baseline established for six - monthly independent assessment - ensuring data robustness, quality and validity.

Next round to be conducted in Feb/March 2015 and expanded to PEF.

Assessment to be conducted on 7th - 8th Oct in Government and PEF schools, and between 18th - 30th Oct in Care, TCF schools. ( Updated on 10th Sept 2015)


TAMO -PEC Planned

Achieved

SourceAnnual TAMO PEC Exam Analysis, TPV Reports


TAMO -DSD Planned

Achieved

SourcePMIU, TAMO TPV Report

Notes

** The stated quality drive refers to the current DTE process of visiting schools for 2 consecutive days to mentor and train teachers.Output Indicator 2.5 Attribution/Project Assumptions

SED - PMIU Planned

92% 90%* 90%* 90%* 90%*

Achieved

92% 92%


Notes Risk Rating* The teacher attendance targets for Milestones 3 onwards were modified ( Post April 2015) to 90 % from the original level of 92 % - The figure of 92 % teacher attendance was not correct as it did not incorporate sick/casual leave, and hence did not serve as a relevant milestone. Medium


Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Improved integrity of PEC exams with reduced cheating and leakage, and improved test design and content quality

PEC improvement plan developed and approved by School Education Department

Strengthened PEC exam development process - PEC exams administered under new, robust invigilation system and with improved quality of marking -

PEC exams administered incorporating learnings from 2015 examinations, and with improved quality of marking

PEC exams executed reliably with incorporated learnings through the report of Third Party Validation

TBD post 2016, based on TPV results

Current PEC exam results are not an accurate measure of student performance , because of fraud during invigilation, logistics, and marking

New plan will dis-incentivize cheating and better manage transparency of exam

Successful rollout dependent on robust item bank, embedded experts, and psychometric evaluation of exam structure



Detailed PEC improvement plan developed, version approved w/c 17th November.

PEC is introducing improvements to exam content and conduct leading up to the February 2015 exams, including development of a new item bank and a new devolved model to significantly reduce cheating.

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Quality and delivery of teacher training and mentoring.

Refine DTE schedule based on robust coaching model, and define proper monitoring mechanism for DTE visits to establish true baseline*

DTE attendance at 90% *

Year 1 quality drive launched**

Maintain DTE attendance at 90%*

Refine quality drive initiative based on learnings from Year 1





Full time management of DTEs and improved DTE training and performance management will enable DTEs to provide better coaching to teachers

No full time district and cluster level administration for DTEs. No clear DTE KPIs and performance management

DTE attendance at 94%, but at 2 visits a month. No full time district and cluster level administration for DTEs. No clear DTE KPIs and performance management

* The current metric used to monitor this indicator is no longer valid, as DTEs are now engaged in a quality drive which requires them to engage a school for 2 consecutive days to mentor and train teachers - An improved metric would be to directly track the number of teachers trained, and this can be incorporated after discussing the validity of data on teachers trained compiled by the DSD. Tracking the increase in the number of Professional Development (PD) days would not add value to the milestones as PD days are conducted only quarterly, and increasing their frequency to monthly would be highly disruptive for the teachers. As a temporary measure, the impact of the quality drive on teacher training and mentoring can be gauged indirectly through the DSD's existing system of monthly quality drive tests of students and the ongoing Literacy and Numeracy (LND) assessments.


Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Teacher attendance rates in government schools

Trainings and accountability will lead to improved teacher attendance - Maintaining teacher attendance and learning outcomes becomes

92.27% [12 month average to Nov 2014]

Compared with 91.93% to Dec 2014


RM-PMIU Planned All districts with functioning of facilities >90%

Achieved



TACE Planned

Achieved TACE not yet started TACE not yet started

SourceTACE progress reports

Notes


TACE - SED - PMIU Planned

Achieved

Source Risk RatingPMIU school census Medium

Notes* This indicator should be optimally stated in terms of ' Schools with multigrade owing to (1) overcrowding due to insufficient classrooms, and (2) overcrowding due to insufficient teachers'.** Milestones set after consultation with SED on July 10th 2015, and are in line with the government's planning figures for classroom construction and teacher recruitment plans. For details on how the total teacher and classroom requirement, please visit Sheet 11 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 3.3'

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Better learning environment

Improved availability and functioning of basic school facilities

All districts with a functioning of facilities >90% or a clear plan to improve functioning of facilities to >90% within the current school year




Presence of basic facilities is critical to getting students to come to and stay in school

Drinking water: Available: 99%, Functional: 99%; Toilets: Available: 98%, Functional: 97%; Walls: Available: 93%, Functional: 92%; Electricity: Available: 85%, Functional: 84%

Drinking water: Available: 99%, Functional: 99%; Toilets: Available: 98%, Functional: 97%; Walls: Available: 93%, Functional: 92%; Electricity: Available: 85%, Functional: 84%

Achieved. Two districts below 90% with clear plan in place

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Aggregate number of classrooms constructed or rehabilitated to international standards

(Indicator & milestones modified in Nov 2015)

Implementation Phase workplan finalised and TACE rolling into implementation.

1) 10 Dangerous School Buildings*

- 8 dangerous school buildings reached milestone 5 level;- 2 dangerous schools reached milestone 4 level

2) 367 primary, elementary and high schools*:

- 217 schools: Milestone 1 level completed;- 150 schools: reached Milestone 2 level

To be agreed in February 2015**



Partially Achieved. A comprehensive workplan has been completed. TACE is ready to start construction work, but the implementation phase has not yet started due to contractual difficulties.

*Refer to TACE workplan for specific detail of milestones expected by 2nd week January.** To be agreed once revised contract is agreed by February 2016.


Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Classrooms with multigrade teaching* Identify districts

Identify list of schools for alternative year entry and double shifting

Create four year plan for classroom construction

Number of primary teachers to be hired to help address multigrade due to insufficient teachers = 13,000** Number of additional classrooms required to help address multigrade due to insufficient classrooms = 20,000**



Ensure primary teacher hiring process is completed

Difficult for teachers to reach all students in multigrade classrooms; students do not get enough individual attention

Success dependent on hiring of enough new, qualified teachers and building of infrastructure.

3.8 million children in multi-grade classrooms; requirement of 20k classrooms and 20k net newly hired teachers to eliminate most severe instances of multi-grade

3.8 million children in multi-grade classrooms; requirement of 20k classrooms and 20k net newly hired teachers to eliminate most severe instances of multi-grade

Partially achieved. Districts identified. Infrastructure Plan proposes research into multi-Grade and multi-shift teaching. Milestone not reflective of the agreed approach to planning.


TAMO - PEF - CSOs Planned

Achieved

SourceCSO submitted enrolment database and PEF independent verification of enrolled students

Notes* Output Indicator 4.1 was modified since the last Annual Review in Jan 2015, and is not the same indicator as the one used in that Annual Review. ** CSO-led enrolment initiative developed and agreed*** Total TAMO supply-side target of 83,000 children to be enrolled in new schools in 2 districts ( Rahimyar Khan & Muzaffargarh) - Please see Sheet 8 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 4.1 & 5.3'Output Indicator 4.2 Attribution/Project Assumptions

TAMO - PEF Planned (i) 358,000 ii) 111,000 iii) 430,000

Achieved

SourcePEF, TAMO Reports

Notes* Milestone 2 was incorrectly calculated, and successive milestones have been calculated correctly and confirmed.

*** Gender disaggregated targets ( edited in August 2015) are based on the current PEF ratio of 55 % boys : 45 % girls for all children enrolled in PEF programmes.


Planned 0 PIEP PIU established and fully functional 31,000 63,000 90,000

Achieved 0 0

Source Risk RatingPIEP progress reports from special education dept.; PEF and TAMO TPV Reports Medium

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Improved access to schools, especially in priority districts

Additional children enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led supply side interventions*

32,000 out of school children enrolled in new schools in 2 priority districts ( Rahimyar Khan and Muzaffargarh) ***

Cumulative 49,000 out of school children enrolled in new schools in 2 priority districts ( Rahimyar Khan and Muzaffargarh) ***

Cumulative 66,000 out of school children enrolled in new schools in 2 priority districts ( Rahimyar Khan and Muzaffargarh) ***

Cumulative 83,000 out of school children enrolled in new schools in 2 priority districts ( Rahimyar Khan and Muzaffargarh) in priority districts ***

PEF is targeting districts where no alternative schools are available (through NSP program)

GET and BRAC,signed on to drive enrolment by establishing new schools in remote areas in 2 priority districts in collaboration with PEF's New School Program. **

Baseline 2012/13


Milestone 2 (November 2014)*

Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19


(i) 350,000 ** ii) 115,000 ** iii) 1.3 million (Boys: (i) 192,500 (ii) 63,250 (iii) 715,000 - Girls ( i) 157,500 (ii) 51,750 (iii) 585,000)***

(i) 475,000** ii) 169,000** iii) 1.42 million (Boys: (i) 261,250 (ii) 92,950 (iii) 781,000 - Girls ( i) 213,750 (ii) 76,050 (iii) 639,000)***

(i) 600,000** ii) 212,000** iii) 1.55 million (Boys: (i) 330,000 (ii) 116,600 (iii) 852,500 - Girls ( i) 270,000 (ii) 95,400 (iii) 697,500)***

(i) 725,000 ii) 281,000** iii) 1.7 million (Boys: (i) 398,750 (ii) 154,550 (iii) 935,000 - Girls ( i) 326,250 (ii) 126,450 (iii) 765,000)***

PEF continues to receive same level of funding

EVS: 122,198NSP: 59,024FAS: 1,176,023

(as of June 2013)

EVS: 208,247NSP: 87,822FAS: 1,299,855

(as of June 2014)

Discrepancies in logframe targets makes assessing progress difficult. [Note: PEF also has its own targets for March 2015: EVS: 108,000 additional children; NSP 28,000 additional children; and FAS: 112,000 additional children.]

Progress as at Nov 2014:(i) 215,213 (93,015 additional) (ii) 88,107 (29,083 additional) (iii) 1,254,615 (93,015 additional)

Progress against PEF’s own March 2014 Targets:Of the three 2013/14 PEF targets only EVS was achieved.

** Original EVS Milestones were based on reporting at the start of the school year - Current EVS Milestones have been revised to reflect reporting in line with the Jan DFI D Annual Review. A similar update has been made to NSP Milestones. - For more detail, please refer to Sheet 9 titled " Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 4.2"


Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Number of children supported through Punjab Inclusive Education Program (cumulative)

TAMO - Special Education Department - PEF

PIEP enrols students with severe disabilities in special programs and students with mild disabilities in regular schools

PC-1 approved, Programme Implementation Unit being established, PIEP to be piloted in districts Bahawalpur and Muzaffargarh

OUTPUT 5 Output Indicator 5.1 Attribution/ProjectBaseline

Assumptions

LUMS - PEEF Planned (i) 260 ii) 7000 (i) 310 ( ii) 6500 * (i) 53 ii) 6000 * (i) 58 ii) 500 * (i) 0 (ii) 0 *

Achieved No scholarships awarded

SourceLUMS/PEEF Quarterly Reports

Notes* For complete detail on the deconstructed targets, please refer to Sheet 10 titled " Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 5.1"Output indicator 5.2 Attribution/Project Assumptions

TAMO - PEF - CSOs Planned

Achieved

SourceCSO Reports, TPV results

Notes

* Social mobilization campaign designed and pilot initiated in these 2 priority districts ( Bahawalpur and Bahawalnagar) ** Total TAMO demand-side target of 217,000 children to be enrolled in new schools in 2 districts ( Bahawalpur & Bahawalnagar) - Please see Sheet 8 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 4.1 & 5.2'Output indicator 5.3 Attribution/Project Assumptions

TAMO - SED Planned

Achieved Not achieved.

Source Risk RatingTAMO Communication Strategy, Perception Survey Reports Medium



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Enhanced demand for education

No of (i) tertiary level scholarships for poor and able student (boys: girls) (ii) higher secondary scholarships for poor and able girls per year. i) 526 (276 LUMS + 250

PEEF)ii) 7,500

Achieved (against both the original targets and queried logframe targets)

i) 325 new scholarships in 2014 vs the agreed target of 260

(846 scholarships in total)

ii) 8,500 new scholarships (vs the agreed target of 7,000).

Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Additional children ( Ages 6 - 11 ) enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led demand side interventions

30,000 additional out of school children enrolled in 2 priority districts ( Bahawalpur and Bahawalnagar) **

Cumulative 93,000 additional children enrolled in 2 priority districts ( Bahawalpur and Bahawalnagar) **



No social mobilization campaign in place

No social mobilization campaign in place

SPO on-board to run social mobilization campaign in 2 priority districts: Bahalwapur and Bahawalnagar *


Baseline 2012/13



Milestone 32015/16

Milestone 42016/17

Milestone 52017/18

Target 2018/19

Communication events held, materials distributed, disaggregated by type of audience

Initial communication strategy articulated, communication specialist mobilized and embedded with SED

Develop communications materials for SED to distribute amongst teachers and field staff regarding the overall reform process and objectives - Conduct a Baseline Perception Survey to measure current attitudes of public towards the reform process

Improve the general awareness of the reform process and acceptability amongst the public ( publish the annual communications publication, individual sub-component communication for each workstream on results achieved ) - Measure shift in reform attitudes and perceptions through the Follow-up Perception Survey.

Continue working towards improving the general awareness of the reform process and acceptability amongst the public - Measure shift in reform attitudes and perceptions through the Follow-up Perception Survey.

Public knowledge and acceptance of the reform process has increased, leading to greater public support for the public school education system in Punjab, as measured by the Final Term Perception Survey on reform attitudes and perceptions of the general public. Conduct a retrospective communications event on the entire PPBP initiative.



Indicator Description Definition Source Reporting frequency Report Availability Target Basis ( where applicable)Impact Indicator 1 Literacy Rate Literacy rate for population in Punjab aged 10 and above PSLM Survey Not applicable

Impact Indicator 2 Secondary completion rate Nielsen Household Survey Six - Monthly Not applicable

Impact Indicator 3 Real GDP growth per capita, Pakistan Real growth in GDP at constant 2010 factor prices World Bank Annually Not applicable

Outcome Indicator 1 Participation rate for primary school aged population (ages 5-9) Nielsen Household Survey Six - Monthly

Outcome Indicator 2 Participation rate for secondary school aged population (ages 10-16) Nielsen Household Survey Six - Monthly

Outcome Indicator 3 Student learning outcomes

Outcome Indicator 4 Student attendance PMIU monthly data Quarterly

Output Indicator 1.1 Quarterly

Output Indicator 1.2 Frequency of MEA visits and better reliability of data collected Quarterly

Output Indicator 1.3 Functional Primary School Councils PMIU monthly data Annually

Output Indicator 2.1 New teaching and learning developed in line with new curriculum Quarterly

2 years - (PSLM survey is carried out every other year)

Pending confirmation of PSLM extension for 2015/2016.

Average participation rate of 15 and 16 year olds, disaggregated by gender--Calculated as: Total 15 and 16 year olds surveyed and attending school / Total population of 15 and 16 year olds surveyed

Nielsen Household Survey - Wave 7 ( July 2015)

Global Economic Prospects (GEP) Reports - June 2015 and December 2015

Average participation rate of 5 to 9 year olds, disaggregated by gender-- Calculated as: Total 5 to 9 year olds (inclusive) surveyed / Total population of 5 to 9 year olds surveyed


Target participation rate ( ages 5- 9) based on the CM's 2018 goals

Average participation rate of 10 to 16 year olds, disaggregated by gender-- Calculated as: Total 10 to 16 year olds (inclusive) surveyed / Total population of 10 to 16 year olds surveyed


Target participation rate ( ages 5- 9) based on the CM's 2018 goals

Aggregate percentage score for each subject tested (Math, English, Urdu)

Calculated as:Average of students' performance against each SLO tested for a given subject. Performance on a given SLO is measured as percentage of students correctly answering the questions covering the SLO.

For each subject, the average of the aggregates for the September and March assessments is taken.

DFID / TAMO Six - Monthly Grade 3 assessment

Six-Monthly measurement; Annual reporting

Six - Monthly Assessment Reports by DFID/TAMO for Grade 3 in September 2015

End target for average student performance for each SLO is at 85 %, and the milestones that lead to this target are successively higher until the target is achieved by the 2018/2019 school year.

Twelve month rolling average of Grades 1 to 12 students monthly attendance (Punjab average)

TAMO Quarterly Progress Reports ( Sep 2015 and Jan 2016)

Maximum student attendance rate set at 90 % ( accounting for sick and casual leave) - ( Gender disaggregated targets have a +/- 1 % point variation)

Number of districts with effective, targeted system wide performance management system

An 'effective' peformance management system implies the following: (1) Pre-DRC Meetings held (2) Correct structure of the Pre-DRC (3) Alignment of the DRC in a phased manner with the Pre-DRC (4) Alignment of DRC and EDO Conference (5) Digitization of Data at EDO Level - For more detail on the process flow for this indicator, please refer to the worksheet titled ' Output Indicator 1.1 - process'

TAMO progress reports, External evaluations/ assessments, PMIU monthly data


Based on the CM's 2018 goal for a better managed, more accountable education system in all districts of Punjab

Twelve month rolling average of MEA visits - Data reliability assessed through (1) DMO monitoring of data collection process through MEA checklist from PMIU (2) PMIU data checks on collected data, followed by TPV on data quality - An additional measure to check the reliability of the collected data is the use of unannounced spot checks ( 2 dedicated weeks across all districts) conducted by DFCs of schools recently visited by MEAs ( subject to the existing workload of activities handled by DFCs in the field).

TAMO DFC Quaterly Audit of MEA visits, PMIU data & MEA checklists, TPV Data Quality Reports


The target of 90 % for the MEA school visit rate is the maximum sustainable attendance rate for MEAs on ground.

Calculated as the percentage of School Councils that are functional, where a functional School Council is defined as one that meets both of the following criteria:-Having regular meetings (at least two meetings per quarter)-Ensuring adequate utilization of funds 'Utilization' of funds refers to the actual spending of funds by School Councils. For effective tracking of School Council fund utilization, two important scenarios will be investigated: (1) 'Zero Spending' by dormant School Councils (2) ' Markaz/Tehsil level spending' of Fund Utilization by School Councils ( To distinguish between poor performing Education Managers and poor performing School Councils). (PMIU collects data on number of School Council meetings in 18 non-NSB districts; for these districts each indicator will be weighted 50%. In 18 NSB districts where there is no data on the number of School Council meetings, functionality will be determined based on utilization of funds)

(i) District Budget Execution Reports (BERs) (ii) Provincial Budget Execution Reports (BERs) (iii) NSB Utilization Reports

Based on (1) CM's 2018 goal for a better managed, more accountable education system in all districts of Punjab (2) TAMO PESP II Workplan

Textbook development for a given school year is completed by January of the calendar year and printing of the textbooks by PCTB commences in April of the same calendar year

PCTB workplan, TAMO Reports on PCTB, Roadmap reports, TPV of Textbooks Development process and procurement system.


Based on (1) CM's 2018 goal for better teacher performance management and teaching (2) TAMO PESP II Workplan

Output Indicator 2.2 Six- Monthly learning assessment system in place Six - Monthly

Output Indicator 2.3 Annually

Output Indicator 2.4 Quality and delivery of teacher training and mentoring PMIU, TAMO TPV Report Quarterly

Output Indicator 2.5 Teacher attendance rates in government schools PMIU monthly data Quarterly

Output Indicator 3.1 Improved availability and functioning of basic school facilities Twelve month rolling average of functioning facilities (Punjab average) PMIU monthly data Quarterly

Output Indicator 3.2 Aggregate number of schools rehabilitated to international standards TACE progress reports Quarterly Target set by DFID

Output Indicator 3.3 Classrooms with multi-grade teaching Percentage of total classrooms with multi-grade teaching PMIU school census Annually PMIU Monthly Data Packs

Output Indicator 4.1 Six- Monthly

Output Indicator 4.2 PEF, TAMO Reports Quarterly

Output Indicator 4.3 Six - Monthly


Output Indicator 5.2 CSO Reports, TPV results Annually


Six - monthly independent assessments ( March & September) of Grade 3 students against specific Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) for each subject: English, Math, and Urdu.

TAMO Assessment Reports, DFC Spot Checks

September Six - Monthly assessment Report by Roadmap and TAMO

Based on DFD requirement for a dedicated, independent six - monthly learning assessment plan

Improved integrity of PEC exams with reduced cheating and leakage, and improved test design and content quality

Annual Assessment of PEC Exam Design (through the TAMO PEC Exam Analysis in May) and Annual Assessment of PEC Exam Conduct through Third Party Validation (TPV) Exercises

Annual TAMO PEC Exam Analysis, TPV Reports

Annual Reports on Exam Design and Conduct ( TAMO, TPV) are released in May of each year.

Based on (1) CM's 2018 goal for better teacher performance management and teaching (2) TAMO PESP II Workplan

Twelve month rolling average of DTE visitsQualitative assessment of quality of teacher training / mentoring by TAMO field team


Maximum sustainable DTE attendance rate was fixed at 90 % but will soon be supplemented by a more qualitative metric/target for assessing improvements in teacher performance.

Twelve month rolling average of monthly teacher attendance (Punjab average)


Maximum sustainable teacher attendance rate was revised down from 92 % to 90 % in April 2015 - ( Gender disaggregated targets have a +/- 1 % point variation )


Based on the CM's 2018 goal for a more appropriate environment for learning in all schools, through the provision of basic facilities.


Bases on Government of Punjab's three year plan for classroom construction and teacher recruitment ( including recruitment record of 2012/2013 and 2013/2014).

Additional children enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led supply side interventions

Cummulative children enrolled in priority districts of Rahimyar Khan and Muzzafargarh in new schools established by CSOs BRAC and GET - For more detail, please refer to Sheet 8 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 4.1 and 5.3'

CSO submitted enrolment database and PEF independent verification of enrolled students

(i) Quarterly Narrative & Financial Report (ii) CSO Monthly Progress Reports (iii) TPV Validation Report

Based on analysis of 2014 Nielsen Survey Results by TAMO - ( Gender disaggregated results are based on the agreed TAMO - CSO contracts with GET, BRAC)


Cumulative (actual) student enrolment as reported by PEF - PEF has a different reporting cycle ( March to March) compared to PESP ( Jan to Jan) - For the purpose of the PESP Annual Review in January each year the exact achievement levels against the stated milestones have to be approximated for the remaining March to Dec term ( as additional children enrolled).


Targets based on PEF Expansion Plan - Gender disaggregated targets ( added in August 2015) are based on the current PEF ratio of 55 % boys : 45 % girls for all children enrolled in PEF programmes.

Number of children supported through Punjab Inclusive Education Program

Children supported includes additional children enrolled as well as already enrolled children provided support (e.g. assistive devices, aids) under PIEP

PIEP progress reports from special education deptt; PEEF and TAMO TPV Reports

TPV Report expected in August 2015

Targets set by Special Education Department and based on School Education Sector Plan, Article 25 -A of the Constitution of Pakistan and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

No of (i) tertiary level scholarships for poor and able student (boys:girls) (ii) higher secondary scholarships for poor and able girls per year.

Tertiary - level scholarships are offered by the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), while higher secondary scholarhips (merit-based) are offered by the Punjab Educational Endowment Fund (PEEF) against provincial and gender-based quotas.

LUMS/PEEF Quarterly Reports, DFID Reports

LUMS/PEEF Quarterly Reports ( Sept 2015 & Jan 2016)

Targets set by LUMS & PEEF in consultation with DFID

Additional children enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led demand side interventions

Cummulative children enrolled in priority districts of Bahawalpur and Bahawalnagar in existing government or PEF schools through social mobilization campaigns and tailored solutions developed by CSO SPO - For more detail, please refer to Sheet 8 titled ' Supporting Evidence (SE) for Output Indicator 4.1 and 5.3'

(i) Quarterly Narrative & Financial Report (ii) CSO Monthly Progress Reports (iii) TPV Validation Report

Based on analysis of 2014 Nielsen Survey Results by TAMO - ( Gender disaggregated results are based on the agreed TAMO - CSO contract with SPO)

Communication events held, materials distributed, disaggregated by type of audience

The perception survey on education reform has two main components: A section to guage the respondent's views and opinions on education reform, and a section to guage the respondent's understanding and awareness of current education reform - The two components can be combined to produce a variety of indices that allow cross-sectional and time-series comparisons of perception across different strata such as gender, age, demographic indicators and occupation.

TAMO progress reports, Perception Survey Reports


To address the communications needs of the Government of Punjab in the implementation of the Education Sector Plan

Outcome Indicators 1 & 2 : Participation Rates ( 5 - 9 & 10 -16)

Nielsen household survey

Participation Rates ( 10 -16) Wave Month Item Female Male

1 Nov-11Participation Rate ( 10 - 16) All Punjab 71.6% 78.6%Participation Rate ( 10 - 16) 11 Priority Districts 56.2% 68.6%

2 Jun-12Participation Rate ( 10 - 16) All Punjab 75.4% 80.7%Participation Rate ( 10 - 16) 11 Priority Districts 61.9% 72.1%


4 Jun-13Participation Rate ( 10 - 16) All Punjab 75.3% 81.3%Participation Rate ( 10 - 16) 11 Priority Districts 58.6% 72.4%



Participation Rates ( 10 -16) Participation Rates ( 5 - 9) Total Wave Month Item Female Male75.3%

1 Nov-11Participation Rate ( 5 - 9 ) All Punjab 82.5% 86.9%

62.7% Participation Rate ( 5 - 9 ) 11 Priority Districts 70.1% 77.9%78.2%

2 Jun-12Participation Rate ( 5 - 9 ) All Punjab 84.4% 87.6%




4 Jun-13Participation Rate ( 5 - 9 ) All Punjab 84.6% 87.1%





72.5% Participation Rate ( 5 - 9 ) 11 Priority Districts 80.2% 84.7%

Participation Rates ( 5 - 9) Total84.8%74.2%86.1%76.6%86.8%77.7%85.9%75.4%88.2%79.9%89.3%82.5%

Outcome indicator 3: Government school students learning outcomes

Student Learning Outcomes ( SLOs)*

Actual Assessment Scores Forecasted Assessment Milestones ***

2014/2015 Year 2015/2016 Year

Sep-14 Feb-15 Average Sep-15 Feb-16 AverageOverall Math 57% 67% 62% 60% 70% 65%Number series 92% 88%2 digit add without carry 77% 84%2 digit add with carry 52% 64%3 digit add with carry 43% 58%2 digit sub without borrow 60% 75%2 digit sub with borrow 33% 48%3 digit sub with borrow 30% 32%1 digit multiplication 64% 79%Fractions 63% 73%

Overall English ** 58% 53% 55% 56% 61% 59%Write missing alphabets in a series 92% 88%Match correct words against pictures 73% 74%Write correct words against pictures 54% 46%Complete a basic sentence 46% 36%Comprehension 23% 23%

Overall Urdu 50% 56% 53% 53% 59% 56%Break words into alphabets 62% 55%Join letters into words 36% 50%Write words against pictures 49% 56%Complete sentence 52% 67%Comprehension 50% 52%

* Percentage of Grade 3 students achieving core Grade 2 SLOs

** On average, SLOs for each subject area show progressive improvement across the same school year, with February scores generally higher than the earlier September scores as students become familiar with the format and content. However, English Assessment Scores for February 2015 were lower than September 2014 scores owing to the introduction of a more difficult format of English Assessment.

*** The forecasted milestones for each subject area follow an average annual 3 % point increase, as agreed in the TAMO May Monthly Monitoring Meeting on 17th June 2015.

Forecasted Assessment Milestones ***

2016/2017 Year 2017/2018 Year 2018/2019 Year

Sep-16 Feb-17 Average Sep-17 Feb-18 Average Sep-18 Feb-1963% 73% 68% 66% 76% 71% 69% 79%

59% 64% 62% 63% 67% 65% 66% 70%

56% 62% 59% 59% 65% 62% 62% 68%

** On average, SLOs for each subject area show progressive improvement across the same school year, with February scores generally higher than the earlier September scores as students become familiar with the format and content. However, English Assessment Scores for February 2015 were lower than September 2014 scores owing to

*** The forecasted milestones for each subject area follow an average annual 3 % point increase, as agreed in the TAMO May Monthly Monitoring Meeting on 17th June

Forecasted Assessment Milestones ***

2018/2019 Year

Average74%

68%

65%

Output Indicator 1.1 - Effective District Performance Management System

Phases in Rollout of District PMSYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

1A -1 Pre-DRC

1A Effective PMS Follow-up Routines 1A -2 Re-alignment of DRC and Pre-DRC ( New Data Packs)

1A -3 Alignment of EDO Conference with DRC/Pre-DRC

1

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

1B Busines Process Improvement (BPR) Design & Concept Pilot in 2 districts ( Rahimyar Khan & Hafizabad) Gradual Phase-Out

Mapping of Existing Processes Data Validation Evaluation of Learnings

Software Development RefinementHR Functions

Software DeploymentStaff Appointment

Capacity BuildingTransfers

Prototype TestingPromotions

Disciplinary Proceedings

Long Term Leave Management

Termination

Effective Performance Management System (PMS)

Outcome indicator 4.1: Additional children enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led supply side interventionsOutcome indicator 5.2: Additional children ( Ages 6 - 11 ) enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led demand side interventions

Type of CSO-led Intervention ( All figures represent number of OOSC)

Supply-side Rahimyar Khan & Muzzafargarh*

( All figures represent number of OOSC)

Demand-side Bahalwapur & Bahawalnagar*

Grand TAMO Target* Based on Nielsen Survey Results 2014** CSO Reporting is from April to April while PEF reports from June to June

Additional Children Enrolled through CSO-led Interventions in Select Priority Districts (Supply-side & Demand-side)

Outcome indicator 4.1: Additional children enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led supply side interventionsOutcome indicator 5.2: Additional children ( Ages 6 - 11 ) enrolled in priority districts as part of CSO-led demand side interventions

Format Year 2** Year 3** Year 4** Year 5**Annual 32,000 17,000 17,000 17,000 Cumulative 32,000 49,000 66,000 83,000 Cumulative (as a % of TAMO Total Supply-side OOSC) 39% 59% 80% 100%

Annual 30,000 63,000 63,000 61,000 Cumulative 30,000 93,000 156,000 217,000 Cumulative (as a % of TAMO Total Demand-side OOSC) 14% 43% 72% 100%

Grand TAMO Target* Based on Nielsen Survey Results 2014** CSO Reporting is from April to April while PEF reports from June to June

Additional Children Enrolled through CSO-led Interventions in Select Priority Districts (Supply-side & Demand-side)

Total TAMO Target 83,000

217,000

300,000

Additional Children Enrolled through CSO-led Interventions in Select Priority Districts (Supply-side &

Outcome indicator 4.2: Number of children in school supported through the Punjab Education Foundation (cumulative) i) EVS ii) NSP iii) FAS

Category Milestones *

(2012/2013) (2013/2014) (2014/2015) Dec-15 (2015/2016) Dec-16 (2016/2017) Dec-17 (2017/2018) Dec-18 (2018/2019)

EVS Education Voucher SchemeAnnual 150,000 50,000 100,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000

Cumulative 150,000 200,000 300,000 350,000 425,000 475,000 550,000 600,000 675,000 725,000 800,000

NSP New Schools ProgrameAnnual 62,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 45,000 55,000 65,000

Cumulative 62,000 87,000 117,000 117,000 152,000 169,000 197,000 212,000 252,000 281,000 317,000

FAS** Foundation Assisted SchoolsAnnual 1,300,000 - 120,000 - 130,000 - 220,000 -

Cumulative - - 1,300,000 1,300,000 1,420,000 1,420,000 1,550,000 1,550,000 1,770,000 1,770,000 1,770,000

Number of children in school supported through the Punjab Education Foundation ( Cumulative) (i) EVS (ii) NSP (iii) FAS

Outcome indicator 5.1: No of (i) tertiary level scholarships for poor and able student (boys:girls) (ii) higher secondary scholarships for poor and able girls per year.

Institution Category Gender(2013/2014) (2014/2015)

LUMS Tertiary Boys & GirlsAnnual 122 175

Cumulative 122 175

PEEF Tertiary Boys & GirlsAnnual 250 150

Cumulative 250 150

Total Tertiary Boys & GirlsAnnual 372 325

Cumulative 372 325

PEEF Higher Secondary Girls OnlyAnnual 7,500 7,000

Cumulative 7,500 7,000

Number of Tertiary Level Scholarship for Poor and Able Students (Girls & Boys) & Higher Secondary Scholarships for Poor and Able Girls per Year

Outcome indicator 5.1: No of (i) tertiary level scholarships for poor and able student (boys:girls) (ii) higher secondary scholarships for poor and able girls per year.

(2015/2016) (2016/2017) (2017/2018) (2018/2019)

210 53 58 -

385 438 496 496

100 - - -

250 250 250 250

310 53 58 -

635 688 746 746

6,500 6,000 500 -

13,500 19,500 20,000 20,000

Number of Tertiary Level Scholarship for Poor and Able Students (Girls & Boys) & Higher Secondary Scholarships for Poor and Able Girls per Year

Output indicator 3.3: Classrooms with multigrade teaching

Calculation for Overcrowding and Multigrade due to Insufficient Teachers

Assumptions

Step Function For the Number of Teachers Required in Schools with Primary Grades ( Katchi - 5 )

For 30 children or lower

For 31 to 45 children




For more than 400 children, divide enrolment by

Rationalization of filled teachers will take place according to the following schedule:

For 2016, fill in schools with a need for 1 teacher

For 2017, fill in schools with a need for 2 teachers

For 2018, fill in schools with a need for 3 or more teachers

Total additional requirement of teachers to address multigrade ( due to insufficient teachers)

Calculation for Overcrowding and Multigrade due to Insufficient ClassroomsAssumptionsStep Function For the Classroooms required in Schools with Primary Grades ( Katchi - 5 )

For 30 children or lower





For more than 310 children, divide enrolment by

Provision of classrooms will take place according to the following schedule:

Additional Classrooms required per School1 Classroom 2 Classrooms 3 Classrooms

For 2016, % of schools assisted 100% 50%

For 2017, % of schools assisted 50% 50%

For 2018, % of schools assisted 50%

For 2016, the total number of classrooms required is 25,176

For 2017, the total number of classrooms required is 22,270

For 2018, the total number of classrooms required is 34,401 Total additional classrooom requirement is 81,847

Calculation for Overcrowding and Multigrade due to Insufficient Teachers

Step Function For the Number of Teachers Required in Schools with Primary Grades ( Katchi - 5 )Cut-off level No. of teachers required

30 2

45 3

180 4

300 6

400 8

50

which implies that 13,003 teachers must be hired



76,280 teachers must be hired

Calculation for Overcrowding and Multigrade due to Insufficient Classrooms

Cut-off level No. of classrooms required30 245 3

150 4230 6310 8

50

Additional Classrooms required per SchoolMore than 3 Classrooms

50%

Output number Output Description Impact Weight (%) Output Performance Impact Weighted Score Risk

1Better managed, more accountable education system

15% 0.0 High

2Better teacher performance and better teaching

30% 0.0 Medium

3Better learning environment

15% 0.0 Medium

4Improved access to schools, especially in priority districts

30% 0.0 Medium

5Enhanced demand for education

10% 0.0 Medium

0.0 ###

Smart GuideTeams should use the guide below to complete the logframe template.

PROJECT TITLEA meaningful, easily understood (plain English) Project Title.IMPACT

OUTCOME

OUTPUTS

Progress against Output milestones and results achieved will be assessed and scored during Annual Reviews and the Project Completion Review.

IMPACT WEIGHTINGOnce you have defined your Outputs, assign a percentage for the contribution each is likely to make towards the achievement of the overall Outcome. The impact weights of all the Outputs will total 100% and each are rounded to the nearest 5%. Impact weightings for Outputs are intended to:

l Promote a more considered approach to the choice of Outputs at project design stage; andl Provide a clearer link to how Output performance relates to project Outcome performance.

INPUTS

INDICATORS

What makes a good indicator?l

l

l

l

l Does not include any element of the targetl

l

l

l

The basic principle is that “if you can measure it, you can manage it”.

Best Practice suggests a maximum of three Indicators per Output.

BASELINEBaselines set the starting point and provide a measure of the situation before your project starts (could be zero if a new project). The baseline is used to measure change and monitor progress.Include a baseline for each of your indicators. The first 6 months of a project may exceptionally be used for assembling baseline data at output level if agreed by your SRO. Use existing data where possible, but check reliability and seek assurances regarding the data quality eg use data from national statistical systems / MIS.

Long term goal to which the project will contribute towards achieving. When drafting the impact statement, consider how your project fits with other efforts from DFID and partners to achieve the impact, ie is your project nested within a broader undertaking?

The outcome of your project identifies what will change, who will benefit and how it will contribute to reducing poverty, including contributions to the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) or Climate Change. An assessment of whether your project achieved the Outcome will be included in the Project Completion Review (PCR). Ongoing monitoring of progress against outcome milestones should still take place as an assessment of whether you expect to achieve the Outcome by the end of the programme will be included in Annual Reviews.

Outputs are the specific, direct deliverables of your project. These will provide the conditions necessary to achieve the Outcome. The logic of the chain from Output to Outcome therefore needs to be clear.

Clarification of inputs is a key part of results-chain thinking. Inputs are specified at the country-level in country operational plans and the project information contained in logframes should feed up into these.The input-level boxes show the amount of money provided by DFID and any partners (£) including, where relevant, the government’s own contribution. This only relates to monetary (not in kind) contributions. At Outcome level this is equal to the sum of Inputs for all Outputs. The DFID share at Outcome Level is a simple, pro rata calculation of DFID’s contribution in monetary terms for all outputs.Information should also be provided for the total number of Annual DFID Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) allocated to this project, based on the time individual staff members will spend on the project. It is understood that this may change through the project cycle, and is intended as a management tool.

Indicators are performance measures, which tell us

Specific – what will be measured? And how?Measurable - data can be collected Relevant - to the results chainUseful – for management decision making

Can be disaggregatedGood mix of Already defined -Consider using

Top Tip – select indicators based on relevance to the Results Chain and the availability of data.

If you need to collect your own data - collect baseline data early – as soon as beneficiaries have been identified but before any results are expected.

MILESTONESMilestones are the desired trajectory from baseline to target, helping you to track progress and make changes to underperforming areas. Will depend on sequencing of activities and data availability.Include REALISTIC milestones given resources and capacity.At the output level include annual milestones for each year of the project (or monthly if short term). At outcome & impact level data may not be available annually.

TARGET (DATE)

Targets set the desired point, showing what is achievable within the timeframe available.

The target is often the last year of the project (or month if its short term).

Include targets dissaggregated by sex/geography/income etc where appropriate. Consider using government targets although if they are too ambitious then make a more realistic estimate.

SOURCEEach Indicator will have a data source to verify the results achieved. List the specific data sources i.e. give the specific data collection e.g. named survey / report and avoid just naming the organisation.State the frequency of the data source and ensure consistency with milestones and targets. Check the source can provide disaggregated data as required.Consider and specify the data collection and reporting responsibilities to ensure the results planned and forecast rows in the logframe are updated on a regular basis.

ASSUMPTIONS

RISK RATING

VALUE FOR MONEYEnsure the outputs and outcome projected represent good value for the invested resources, at the beginning of the project, and through its life.

VfM is achieved at different stages of the results chain. Thus for each result we seek to achieve we should aim to have metrics for each of the following:

DFID’s Approach to Value for Money (Smart Guide) provides further advice on ensuring VfM.

Include realistic targets given resources and capacity, the baseline situation, funding available and country/operational context. Project targets might be informed by evidence about what has worked in the past and take into account lessons learned from other projects.

Top Tip - A good Theory of Change will help you think about what is realistic and achievable as it will enable critical reflection of context, external influences & assumptions.

Top Tip - Before using a data source, assess its quality and seek assurances from data providers where needed ie consider its validity, reliability and availability.

Define any assumptions which are linked to the realisation of your project's individual outputs, as well as those which are critical to the realisation of the outcome and impact: these will not all be the same.

Risk ratings are recorded as

Consider including VfM metrics in the logframe (or other documents such as the Delivery Plan) to allow VfM to be measured through the life of the project and to provide assurance at Annual Review.

Economy - Are we (or our agents) buying inputs of the appropriate quality at the right price? Efficiency - How well are we (or our agents) converting inputs into outputs? (‘Effectiveness - How well are the outputs produced by an intervention having the intended effect? (‘Cost-effectiveness

Teams should use the guide below to complete the logframe template.

PROJECT TITLEA meaningful, easily understood (plain English) Project Title.IMPACT

OUTCOME

OUTPUTS

Progress against Output milestones and results achieved will be assessed and scored during Annual Reviews and the Project Completion Review.

IMPACT WEIGHTINGOnce you have defined your Outputs, assign a percentage for the contribution each is likely to make towards the achievement of the overall Outcome. The impact weights of all the Outputs will total 100% and each are rounded to the nearest 5%. Impact weightings for Outputs are intended to:

Promote a more considered approach to the choice of Outputs at project design stage; andProvide a clearer link to how Output performance relates to project Outcome performance.

INPUTS

INDICATORS

What makes a good indicator?

Does not include any element of the target

The basic principle is that “if you can measure it, you can manage it”.

Best Practice suggests a maximum of three Indicators per Output.

BASELINEBaselines set the starting point and provide a measure of the situation before your project starts (could be zero if a new project). The baseline is used to measure change and monitor progress.Include a baseline for each of your indicators. The first 6 months of a project may exceptionally be used for assembling baseline data at output level if agreed by your SRO. Use existing data where possible, but check reliability and seek assurances regarding the data quality eg use data from national statistical systems / MIS.

Long term goal to which the project will contribute towards achieving. When drafting the impact statement, consider how your project fits with other efforts from DFID and partners to achieve the impact, ie is your project nested within a broader undertaking?

The outcome of your project identifies what will change, who will benefit and how it will contribute to reducing poverty, including contributions to the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) or Climate Change. An assessment of whether your project achieved the Outcome will be included in the Project Completion Review (PCR). Ongoing monitoring of progress against outcome milestones should still take place as an assessment of whether you expect to achieve the Outcome by the end of the programme will be included in Annual Reviews.

Outputs are the specific, direct deliverables of your project. These will provide the conditions necessary to achieve the Outcome. The logic of the chain from Output to Outcome therefore needs to be clear.

Clarification of inputs is a key part of results-chain thinking. Inputs are specified at the country-level in country operational plans and the project information contained in logframes should feed up into these.The input-level boxes show the amount of money provided by DFID and any partners (£) including, where relevant, the government’s own contribution. This only relates to monetary (not in kind) contributions. At Outcome level this is equal to the sum of Inputs for all Outputs. The DFID share at Outcome Level is a simple, pro rata calculation of DFID’s contribution in monetary terms for all outputs.Information should also be provided for the total number of Annual DFID Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) allocated to this project, based on the time individual staff members will spend on the project. It is understood that this may change through the project cycle, and is intended as a management tool.

Indicators are performance measures, which tell us what will be measured not what is to be achieved. Avoid including elements of the baseline or target.

Specific – what will be measured? And how?Measurable - data can be collected Relevant - to the results chainUseful – for management decision making

Can be disaggregated if relevant Good mix of qualitative and quantitativeAlready defined - if relevant include indicators which towards the DRF / OP / ICF KPIs / MDGs. Consider using standard indicators / best practice indicators / learning from other projects

– select indicators based on relevance to the Results Chain and the availability of data.

If you need to collect your own data - collect baseline data early – as soon as beneficiaries have been identified but before any results are expected.

MILESTONESMilestones are the desired trajectory from baseline to target, helping you to track progress and make changes to underperforming areas. Will depend on sequencing of activities and data availability.Include REALISTIC milestones given resources and capacity.At the output level include annual milestones for each year of the project (or monthly if short term). At outcome & impact level data may not be available annually.

TARGET (DATE)

Targets set the desired point, showing what is achievable within the timeframe available.

The target is often the last year of the project (or month if its short term).

Include targets dissaggregated by sex/geography/income etc where appropriate. Consider using government targets although if they are too ambitious then make a more realistic estimate.

SOURCEEach Indicator will have a data source to verify the results achieved. List the specific data sources i.e. give the specific data collection e.g. named survey / report and avoid just naming the organisation.State the frequency of the data source and ensure consistency with milestones and targets. Check the source can provide disaggregated data as required.Consider and specify the data collection and reporting responsibilities to ensure the results planned and forecast rows in the logframe are updated on a regular basis.

ASSUMPTIONS

RISK RATING

VALUE FOR MONEYEnsure the outputs and outcome projected represent good value for the invested resources, at the beginning of the project, and through its life.

VfM is achieved at different stages of the results chain. Thus for each result we seek to achieve we should aim to have metrics for each of the following:

DFID’s Approach to Value for Money (Smart Guide) provides further advice on ensuring VfM.

Include realistic targets given resources and capacity, the baseline situation, funding available and country/operational context. Project targets might be informed by evidence about what has worked in the past and take into account lessons learned from other projects.

- A good Theory of Change will help you think about what is realistic and achievable as it will enable critical reflection of context, external influences & assumptions.

- Before using a data source, assess its quality and seek assurances from data providers where needed ie consider its validity, reliability and availability.

Define any assumptions which are linked to the realisation of your project's individual outputs, as well as those which are critical to the realisation of the outcome and impact: these will not all be the same.

Risk ratings are recorded as Low, Medium or High and are supported by a robust analysis including a risk matrix.

Consider including VfM metrics in the logframe (or other documents such as the Delivery Plan) to allow VfM to be measured through the life of the project and to provide assurance at Annual Review.

Economy - Are we (or our agents) buying inputs of the appropriate quality at the right price? Efficiency - How well are we (or our agents) converting inputs into outputs? (‘Spending well’)Effectiveness - How well are the outputs produced by an intervention having the intended effect? (‘Spending wisely’)Cost-effectiveness - What is the intervention’s ultimate impact on poverty reduction, relative to the inputs that we or our agents invest in it?

Documents

[XLS]iati.dfid.gov.ukiati.dfid.gov.uk/iati_documents/7156011.xlsx · Web viewBetter teacher performance and better teaching Output Indicator 2.3 First test conducted at acceptable